SynthesisCJEM2025
Improving patient care experience in the pediatric emergency department: a systematic review.
Synthesis in CJEM, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe primary objective of the project was to summarize existing evidence on patient experiences in pediatric emergency departments (EDs). The secondary objectives were to characterize patient care experience in pediatric EDs, identify barriers to optimal patient care in pediatric EDs, and identify equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) principles influencing pediatric emergency care.
methodsWe performed a systematic review of cohort, cross-sectional, and controlled clinical studies on children's (≤ 21 years) experience in the pediatric ED. We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycInfo (Ovid), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Ovid), CENTRAL (Ovid), and CINAHL (EBSCO) from inception until September 7, 2023. Two reviewers independently screened articles for primary outcomes involving any health care outcome or health care utilization, along with secondary outcomes of EDI factors influencing patient care. Data were obtained from included studies using narrative and descriptive analysis. The process was strengthened by input from patients, families, and providers on the Manitoba Emergency Advisory Committee, who proposed additional areas for consideration.
resultsSix articles were included, assessing 12 experiences. All studies were from high-volume centers. The primary outcome data indicated an overall satisfaction being rated positively, with satisfaction levels exceeding 70% despite lower ratings in privacy, communication, and waiting areas. Wait times and speed of care were significantly correlated with satisfaction (r = -0.48, P < 0.01 and r = 0.38, P < 0.01, respectively), noting wait times and privacy as barriers to care. The EDI factor impacting patient experience was race, showing decreased scores for privacy and patient voice for those identifying as non-white.
conclusionsEven with a high overall satisfaction in the pediatric EDs, aspects influencing the experience can be improved. Wait times, waiting areas, privacy and EDI factor such as race should be addressed to help overcome barriers and improve the care patients receive.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40249564What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.